LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteNothing like the soothing tones of reason.
I wonder if the Arabs really know or care how silly they sound? From what little I know of the culture, if they thought they were being perceived as silly, they would care.
-dale
Arabs rebuff US calls for reforms
Say progress will be difficult without resolving Arab-Israeli conflict
RABAT: Arab nations on Saturday rebuffed US calls for speedy democratic reforms, insisting that steps the United States deems essential to stem terrorism be tied to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.
While agreeing that political, social and economic liberalisation is desirable, senior Arab diplomats disagreed with outgoing US Secretary of State Colin Powell’s argument that reforms could not be delayed for any reason.
Speaker after speaker at the "Forum for the Future" conference here said progress would be difficult, if not impossible, without a resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict and lambasted the perceived US bias toward Israel.
In the final chairman’s statement, meeting participants said "their support for reform in the region will go hand-in-hand with their support for a just, comprehensive and lasting settlement to the Arab-Israeli conflict."
Although the United States signed onto the statement, Powell, who was ending what is likely his last official trip abroad, disagreed with the conditions attached to moving ahead with change.
"We can’t hold up reform or slow the pace of reform or keep reform from accelerating because of these other issues," he said at a news conference with the Moroccan foreign minister, who co-chaired the meeting.
"They affect the environment in which we are operating but nevertheless, reform is necessary," Powell said at the close of the forum that was attended by top officials from more than 20 Middle East and North African countries.
During the meeting, Powell had made the same case directly to the participants, telling them not "to argue about the pace of democratic reform or whether economic reform must precede political reform."
"Increasing opportunities for all citizens, especially women, should not be put on hold to deal with other concerns," he said.
"All of us confront the daily threat of terrorism," Powell said and added "To defeat the murderous extremists in our midst, we must work together to address the causes of despair and frustration that extremists exploit for their own ends."
While his audience listened politely, there was clear resistance to putting reforms ahead of a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian or wider Middle East conflict, which they see as the most destabilising element in the region.
Arab League chief Amr Mussa insisted that peace in the region was necessary for the reforms envisioned by the US-proposed Broader Middle East and North Africa (BMENA) initiative that has been endorsed by the Group of Eight industrialised countries.
He said an independent Palestine "is a must" if the US plan is to have any chance of working. Mussa also questioned whether it was possible "when one of the parties is accused of terrorism" or "without a just peace in the Middle East and Iraq’s freedom from anarchy and destruction."
Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal put it even more bluntly, telling the conference that the perceived US bias toward Israel was the main obstacle to promoting reform in the region.
"The real bone of contention is the longest conflict in modern history," he said and added "For too long the Arabs have witnessed the Western bias toward Israel." The prince said the Arab world understood the US security guarantees to Israel but could not comprehend how Washington’s backing for regional democracy did not extend to restraining Israel in the Palestinian territories.
"What the Arabs cannot fathom is why these guarantees are translated into unrestricted backing of unrestrained Israeli policies (that are) contrary to international legality," Saud said.
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit echoed his Saudi counterpart and said reform moves would remain stalled without action on the internationally backed "roadmap" peace plan to end the Israeli-Palestinian crisis.
Their comments reflected the outcry the US plan has provoked in many of the countries targeted for reforms from Mauritania to Pakistan, where anti-Americanism runs high over the Iraq war and the US Middle East policy.
There are also deep suspicions that the United States wants to use the initiative to impose Western values on traditional societies, a sentiment US officials have struggled to refute.
The final statement, though, made clear that the forum had agreed that reforms must be homegrown, could not be imposed from outside and had to move at a pace suitable for each country.
And despite the differences, the participants agreed to meet again next year in Bahrain.
On Friday, Powell downplayed hopes for major breakthroughs at the conference, saying that just holding the meeting was a success because of the impression that it was the United States "dictating to the world".
After the meeting concluded, he expressed satisfaction that the forum had agreed on a number of economic and social initiatives such as a micro-credit scheme, a task force on foreign investment and a literacy programme.
The US officials had hoped to be able to announce the creation of a 100-million-dollar fund to assist small businesses in the region, but at the end of the conference only 60 million dollars had been pledged.
_____________________
when they make no laws but what they themselves and their posterity must be subject to; when they can give no money, but what they must pay their share of; when they can do no mischief, but what must fall upon their own heads in common with their countrymen; their principals may expect then good laws, little mischief, and much frugality
Nothing like the soothing tones of reason.
I wonder if the Arabs really know or care how silly they sound? From what little I know of the culture, if they thought they were being perceived as silly, they would care.
-dale
Originally Posted by dalem
Nothing like the soothing tones of reason.
I wonder if the Arabs really know or care how silly they sound? From what little I know of the culture, if they thought they were being perceived as silly, they would care.
-dale
Arab leaders are truly frightened of political reform, and they have reason to be. Former dictators do not fair well after being pushed from their leadership positions--even in the wake of democratic elections held at their behest. As such, diplomats from those countries (let's face it, that's ALL of the Arab countries) will pay lip service to the concept of reform, but there will be little if any of a tangible push in that direction.
The philosophy of "dictatorships breed terrorism" is quite correct. When you enforce a political system based upon "might makes right," then you invite into that process the concept of violence being necessary to achieve political change. Terrorists in that region of the world don't just have our American citizens--be they military or civilians--in the crosshairs, they also have a desire for real political power in their own countries. This puts many Arab leaders between a rock and a hard place--particularly those who aren't friendly towards the United States. They want these terrorists to stir up chaos for America at every available opportunity, but they also know that these people represent a genuine threat to the continuation of their regimes. It's a fine line that they have to tread. Added into the mix is that many Arab citizens support these groups with aid in a variety of forms. It's a peculiar form of democracy, sort of a checks-and-balances system, whereby even dictators are made aware of the potential for populace-inspired political change.
The bottom line is that I don't see Arab governments embracing democratic reforms any time in the near future. Absent of their ability to redirect any hostility of their citizenry, Arab leaders know that the seething resentment lurking under the surface of many Arab citizens would translate into a bloodbath at their expense should they lose political control of their countries.
"If I see further than other men, it is because I stand upon the shoulders of giants."
--Sir Isaac Newton
True enough for the dictators, but I was thinking more of whatever "moderate" class of folks might exist in that part of the world.
-dale
Well, it would seem that in that part of the world, the word "moderate" is a euphamism for floor mat.
"If I see further than other men, it is because I stand upon the shoulders of giants."
--Sir Isaac Newton
No real argument from me. I'm just trying to see all options.
-dale
I wonder if I am right in stating that Democracy is alien to the Arab culture as also Islam.
In Islam everything that can happen and what should be done is written down in their Holy Book and Laws. Deviation can mean being ostracised. No burial by any Mullahman.
Therefore, try as one might, they will not embrace Democracy. That is why folks like Saddam, the Saudi Kings can get away with murder.
Democracy to some extent can still peep its head into Asiatic Islamic countries because of their colonial past, but not in the badlands of Arabia. They are what is the popular term being used out here on the board - camel jockeys.
Last edited by Ray; 13 Dec 04, at 17:34.
It's all too obvious that democracy is an alien concept to Arab cultures. They are lands populated with peoples who subscribe to the notion of living by the sword and perishing by it. Enlightenment is regarded as a threat by those in power. That is why there is no social growth in any of their countries. Oil has been both a blessing and a curse to them. It allows them access to the technological age--an age they would probably not have achieved on their own without oil. But it has also complicated efforts by their 'leaders' to maintain a stranglehold on their peoples.
Democracy begins with a dream of true justice in a society. Unfortunately, religious dogma has already defined what truth and justice is in their societies. And Islam so permeates every facet of their cultures that their is no escaping it. The tenets of Islam are non-negotiable in the minds of many followers. No challenge to it is permitted--and democracy is a threat to that doctrine. Karl Marx once wrote "Religion is the opiate of the masses." Unlike the communists, the rulers of Arab lands use that opiate to control virtually every aspect of their citizens' lives. Many of them may see the evil that comes with it, but being a good Muslim means accepting the bad with the good.
"If I see further than other men, it is because I stand upon the shoulders of giants."
--Sir Isaac Newton
Lucien
Allow me to add to your analysis - Democracy is essentially a ethical concept - what we see these days is an Islam that is devoid of ethics. You would be mistaken in thinking that the entirety of Islam and Islamic scholarship is certainly not so cursed.
Notice now little any other than an internal war over what Islam is and is not, is at work. The authoritarian, even totalitarian governance is in fact a component of a Islam devoid of ethics and an Islam that focuses not on Faith but certitude.
Change is the enemy of this system, and you are exactly right that at the heart of this is the rejection of the provisional nature of knowledge and all structures of which it is foundation.
Last edited by tarek; 14 Dec 04, at 16:38.
_____________________
when they make no laws but what they themselves and their posterity must be subject to; when they can give no money, but what they must pay their share of; when they can do no mischief, but what must fall upon their own heads in common with their countrymen; their principals may expect then good laws, little mischief, and much frugality
Democracy is two things, making a decision for yourself and your country, and seeking a compromise when another disagrees. It isn't easy to do, but it isn't hard if one tries.
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry
The Arab culture has never experienced democracy in their existence.
How can one change the mindset?
If anyone can achieve this, it will be a great boon to international society, well being and peace.
It may be impossible to change their mindset, but we have to try. Knock in a few doors, force them to let their people see that there are choices they can make about personal liberty, women's rights, compromise, etc. Let them see there is a choice.
If they see the choices and still can't or won't ease back, then I guess it's war and the eventual end of Arab culture and "civilization".
-dale
So turkey is not a Democratic state then? The ME is short of Mustafa Kemel-like individuals, thats the real problem.
"How can one change the mindset?
By changing the ideas that are the foundation of this mindset. This problem can "best" be dealt with by challenging the ideas that are foundational, integral, for this mindset. For example:
What is Method in Islam? How do we know what we "propose" to know?
What is the nature of knowledge?
Is Islamic knowledge and islam the religion the same thing??
These 3 inter-related question devastate the foundation of the mindset that we find so troubling.
Strongly encourage all readers to please read Muslims scholars such as Allamah Mohammed iqbal lahori, Fazl ur Rahman, Abdolkarim Sorush, Mohsin kadivar.... A challenge to the mindset does exist and it is continuing to evolve, I would offer a caveat that on this issue we take care with regard to the lens we use to see thru - we are encouraging the idea that if one changes the ideas with which we construct realities, we change realities themselves - and yet this the same method the obscuritanist knows all too well.
Without widespread education based primarily on the method of science, the hearts and minds we seek to influence, these seed ideas will not find fertile soil.
_____________________
when they make no laws but what they themselves and their posterity must be subject to; when they can give no money, but what they must pay their share of; when they can do no mischief, but what must fall upon their own heads in common with their countrymen; their principals may expect then good laws, little mischief, and much frugality
Tarek,
The idea is good.
When Iqbal said that certain issues iof Islam was changeable (the exact stuff is on this board somewhere), he was nearly accused of blasphemy.
If Inquistion and other horrific rules in Christainity can be changed so can it be done in Islam.
The question is: is that vast majority (and the vast majority are poverty stricken and hence illiterates) be able to read?
In India, they can recite the Koran by rote in Arabic. But ask them to explain!
Three are quite a large number of Moslems in India who won't wtch TV or see a cinema or hear music. It is true (especially in the villages). They claim it is in the Koran.
I am referring to the vast majority of Moslems and not some of the educated one.
In Hijb ul Mujahideen, the terrorist grtoup actiive in India, while the vvast majority are illiterates, yet there was an aeronautical engineer who had been educated. in the US. Such guys can be addressed with your ideas, but I wonder if it will work with the illiterates!
But yes, no harm trying.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Share this thread with friends: